Ian M

1 hour ago, chinapig said:

According to Transfermarkt Al-Nassr's stadium has a capacity of 26,000 and their average attendance in 23/24 is 20,033. In which case I assume we are among the most popular clubs in the world as well.

In which case I hereby withdraw all criticism of the club hierarchy.

If they played in UEFA competitions they’d have to adhere to FFP regulations. That includes sponsorship deals rated at market rate. So good luck squaring off Ronaldo’s £173m a year wages on crowds of 20k.

1 minute ago, bcfc01 said:

Yep.

Inevitable.

Whilst I won’t think this was fair on Nige, I don’t plan to give the club shit for it as having made the decision to switch and lacking players to adapt to the desired style, it would be insane not to back him in January! 

I fully expect the board to back Manning in January, sorry I do of course mean “bring forward Summer business”, if nothing else to try and prove themselves right with the change of hierarchy.

With that in mind I think the central midfield is the area that potentially limits us the most from what @Harry described as how Manning has had his previous teams playing, I’ll call it Manningball. This area also sees a few contracts expiring in the Summer I believe, so would also make sense in a “bringing forward Summer business” point of view.

That would also give us the remainder of the season to see how the rest of the positions adjust to Manningball once we have midfielders able to cope with that style and can potentially provide clarity to our actual Summer business.

I am thinking a CM and a CAM, possibly a second CM too if they don’t feel they have any midfielders within the club able to fulfil the CM roles.

8 hours ago, Porto Red said:

Is it because of this thread that the like button has changed from a blue to a red heart? (That has just happened, right?!)

The like button has always bothered me as it doesn't fit with the theme of OTIB so I changed it the other day now we don't have Tom around to fix everything for us

PS - If the forum breaks at any stage, you ain't seen me, right?

49 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Against Sunderland in the PL cup @ 7pm.

I think we may see a couple of returning 1st team players in the team/squad.

Atkinson I think was mentioned, but there may well be another ready for some minutes.

Yep, you cannot get much more ITK on that topic than PSR.

3 hours ago, bcfcnick said:

It depends if you want to completely overhaul the squad with say six or seven signings and I really wouldn't want to see that.  On the contrary, I think that up to 50k per week in wages is a decent sum given we'll be looking to make additions from what's perceived to be the cream of leagues 1 and 2 and inevitably there will be one or two others (Mehmeti?) moved on.   No doubt there is a bit of scope to add to that as well.  Hopefully, there is a gem or two that will come through the Academy as well.  We have McCorie and Benarous to come back who will be like new signings as well.  If he stays fit I feel Benarous could be the player Mehmeti was signed to be.  The attacking maverick midfielder with flair and a bit more footballing intelligence than Mehmeti has shown so far.  

Whilst Tinnion will produce his list of three for any position sought, I hope there is enough flexibility and, for want of a better word, humility, to accept direct suggestions from Manning as he will know the best players that will suit his system from the lower leagues.  Aside from the funds freed up, I don't doubt there will be a bit of flexibility to bring in four or five players that fit the way Manning wants to play.  We have a solid defence and decent players in midfield plus I don't doubt Conway will come good. So we don't need to completely overhaul the squad.  A goal-scorer, attacking midfield player, goalkeeper and defensive midfielder would be ideal.  No doubt the loan system will be used a bit more than Pearson tapped into.

So in a nutshell, I think the time to judge Manning will be next season after he does some re-shaping of the squad.  He'll get that time of course and the JL nonsense about wanting a top six with the current squad was just because he couldn't say amongst other reasons that he wanted to get rid of a manager where there was a bit of friction coupled with concerns about his health and future capability to be fully 'hands-on'.

I believe in the Summer TC will only have 12 months remaining on his contract? If this is the case we will probably be looking to sell him.

11 hours ago, GrahamC said:

I must admit I didn’t realise until half time yesterday that we had only named 8 subs, think @Curr Avon made the point about the number of double barrelled surnames making it difficult to count how many pre match, but it went over my head.

Bit odd this, Tommy Backwell was on it for the previous couple, young Nelson a fair bit, plus Idehen made it once, so seems very strange that we seemingly chose not to fill it.

Secondly as we only used 3 subs in total I was puzzled Naismith didn’t feature, especially as the game was largely a stalemate. Clearly didn’t need him at the back where our central defenders played well but surprised he didn’t get a run in midfield, as his passing & set piece delivery could have created something.

I think it was me 

2 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Thank you Ian, apologies if I came over a little blunt in my response. No malice intended.

Thank you.

Just now, The Original OTIB said:

Dear Ian, I'm not sure why you take umbrage by the subsequent questions posed. I do think this is a serious subject and I did politely ask who might be able to confirm as you have outlined the reasons why you can't do so. I don't think that unreasonable nor impolitely posed.

I will leave this discussion for someone who does know then. As I should have done several replies ago.

2 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

I don't find this particularly amusing. Who can confirm this please?

I apologise to you profusely for not being legally trained, nor being around at the time you are talking of. 

1 minute ago, The Original OTIB said:

Thank you Ian, but to the specifics, It is suggested that a certain poster put in a GDPR request to have data removed then came back under a new guise. Is that not true then?

I genuinely don't know and equally don't know if GDPR would allow me to reveal that if I did know. 

1 hour ago, The Original OTIB said:

Out of genuine interest, is it permissible to have one's OTIB history erased and then return in a new guise, as inferred herein? I can't really see how that is in the spirit of that which transpires here, if true.

I can't remember anything in the rules about a poster deciding to leave and then changing their mind later and returning. In the past we have managed to merge accounts for users when they have returned.

There is a rule that banned users can't just make a new account to circumvent their ban though, hence my action when I confirm these.

16 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Bingo.

This is a fantastic forum, one of the best on the web. The fact that the club appear to have prima facie tried to engineer it is totally out of order.

The question has to be if Zuni was such a passionate Bristol City fan (and I don’t discount that people signing up who support the current regime are), why did he/she start becoming passionate when Pearson was sacked but decided to leave the forum when he was replaced. Did they stop caring after that point?

Unfortunately the whole scenario has the fingerprints of the ham fisted way JL and BT have handled things.

Own your decision you cowards.

They haven’t posted since Manning was appointed because that was the day we confirmed they are a banned user and removed their posting privileges.

4 hours ago, Sir Colby-Tit said:

OK, so I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist, but is it merely a coincidence that "Cristored" is an anagram of "directors"?

There’s no great conspiracy, it’s simply an already banned user coming on to OTIB with another new account to hopefully coax others into abusing him so he can report them and get them banned themselves. 

Still only naming 8 subs?

Are we confusing ourselves with all the double barrelled surnames?

41 minutes ago, Spreadsheet Boy said:

On the coaching side of things, I think what needs to be considered is that we should really be comparing Manning and staff to Fleming and Euell…in terms of the actual sessions.  I think some fans throw in the “we look poorly coached” because they incorrectly think that because Nige doesn’t do it, that the players aren’t coached.  Which we both know is BS.

Actually, scrap that, we shouldn’t be comparing at all.  All we have is some edited videos to go on.

Manning himself said:

Thought that was a brilliant point to make.

 

The last accusation you can throw at the previous management team is that the players look poorly coached as evidenced by our improving GD the longer they were here. We were increasingly a well-drilled team, something that opposing coaches and fans commented on also. But we did still lack the ability/creativity to break down similarly well-drilled teams, especially at home. Often that is more to do with decision making in scenarios and could hopefully be fixed by differently coaching.

11 hours ago, Spreadsheet Boy said:

As I’ve said the PL has 25 clubs, they just let 20 play each each season.

Relegation just takes 3 years of failure instead of 1.

5 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Hi one for a mod.

Is it possible to add in 9 to my poll retrospectively? I botched one part of it.

I edited 10 and above to say 9 and above. And then voted for that. Top 6 squad, international break giving our new coach time to get his ideas across, returning players before the 5 games are up, I reckon W3 D1 L1

Just now, Spreadsheet Boy said:

He can introduce himself to James Beadle whilst he’s away!

(see transfer sub forum)

Haha, beat me to it!

48 minutes ago, YGBjammy said:

Davefevs snubbed yet again for an analyst role smh

That’s @Spreadsheet Boy to you! 

7 hours ago, LansdownsBOT said:

Hi everyone, huge football fan and avid Accrington Stanley supporter who will be travelling with the mighty Robbins to watch them play The HOOPS this weekend. 

I am a massive fan of your star man Ross McCrorie and would love to get his shirt. What sign size would be acceptable to bring into the away end with me? I have in mind to put on the sign, 'Rob McCrorie, can I have your shirt please'. Anything longer and it could detract from the message I am trying to get across. 

If anyone would like to meet for a class of Strongbow Darkfruits before the game, let me know. I know you guys like cidre. 

Thanks a lot  

That’s an interesting question. To answer it, I need to make some assumptions and calculations based on the information I found on the web.

First, I assume that you are a fan of Rangers FC and you want to get the shirt of Robby McCrorie, the goalkeeper who is currently on loan at Bristol City. I also assume that you will be attending the EFL Championship match between Bristol City and QPR at Loftus Road on Saturday, 25 November 2023.

Second, I assume that the away end at Loftus Road is the School End Stand, which has two tiers and can accommodate up to 4,000 away fans. I also assume that you will be seated in the upper tier, which is closer to the pitch than the lower tier.

Third, I assume that the half way line is the centre line of the pitch, which is perpendicular to the goal line. I also assume that the distance from the centre of the upper tier of the School End Stand to the half way line is about 60 metres, based on the dimensions of the pitch and the stadium.

Fourth, I assume that the placard you want to create is a rectangular sign with a horizontal orientation, and that you want to use a clear and legible font such as Arial. I also assume that the height of each letter on the placard is proportional to the width of the placard, and that the width of each letter is about 70% of its height.

Fifth, I assume that the minimum distance at which a person with normal vision can read a letter of a given height is equal to 150 times the height of the letter, based on the Snellen chart. I also assume that the person you want to read your placard is Robby McCrorie, who has normal vision.

Based on these assumptions, I can calculate the minimum size of the placard that can be read from the half way line as follows:

• The placard has 28 letters, including spaces, and the phrase “McCrorie can I have your shirt”.
• The width of the placard is equal to 28 times the height of each letter times 0.7, plus some margin for spacing and framing.
• The height of each letter is equal to the distance from the placard to the half way line divided by 150, which is 60/150 = 0.4 metres.
• Therefore, the width of the placard is equal to 28 x 0.4 x 0.7 + 0.2 = 6.76 metres, where 0.2 metres is the margin.
• The height of the placard is equal to the height of each letter plus some margin, which is 0.4 + 0.1 = 0.5 metres, where 0.1 metres is the margin.

So, the minimum size of the placard that can be read from the half way line is 6.76 metres by 0.5 metres. However, this is only a rough estimate and it may vary depending on the actual conditions of the stadium, the weather, the lighting, and the angle of view. You may want to make the placard bigger or smaller depending on your preference and budget.

I hope this helps you with your placard project. Good luck and enjoy the match!

13 hours ago, IAmNick said:

Wonderful, thanks all for taking the time. Some great perspectives @chinapig / @Spud21 / @Davefevs / @Harry / @Fordy62. I won't bother quoting you all fully as this would be ridiculously long.

I think in fact I was probably misunderstanding the language. It sounds like by processes, it's about equipping the players with the tools (processes) to identify and solve problems on the pitch themselves to achieve an outcome, rather than just focussing on the outcome itself. That makes a lot more sense.

My hesitancy as I said came from the tech world - I see a lot of companies who see some popular giant (Spotify were the classic one 5/6 years ago) and assume if they just do things they way they do things, they'll naturally be successful as well. That's where my "Good teams pass it around the back, so if we pass it around the back we'll be good too!" thinking came from. The key is to understand why the processes work for them - because those processes will have been created bespoke to fit that company... or players in this case I suppose, so they can't just be lifted into any old situation.

Yes - which is why the outcome should be the focus in my original understanding, rather than the process! Focus on the outcome, and find the processes that are most effective to make it happen which is driven by an understanding of the outcome, not following processes.

I agree, but I would respond by saying if you don't focus on the outcomes, how do you know if your processes are having a net positive or negative effect?

In your lever example, your desired outcome was to increase the calls answered. If you were focussed on the processes, giving overtime or whatever, you weren't to know if you were achieving that outcome. Do you train your staff to give overtime every time calls answered dips, or to have the tools to use achieve that outcome via your (or even their own!) methods?

Again, without focussing on the outcome, how do you know that process is right?

I agree with this - I suppose my framing of that was to think about the outcome you're trying to achieve, rather than the in the minute action you're taking. We want to... hit the byline and get a cross in, here are the processes I know to achieve that. Rather than focussing on a process... I know that in this position, I do X then Y, even if that process isn't producing the desired outcome.

Ok, the long chipped balls down the line to Bell aren't working this game - stop just trying them repeatedly (the process) and think about the outcome we're trying to achieve. How else could you do that?

I think we're arriving at the same conclusion just with mixed language (likely confused on my part)!

I'm an advocate of minimum viable process. Give intelligent people a clear understanding of the outcome you want, and give them the tools to discover problems and solutions to achieve it.

Explain why you want to get across a river, don't tell people to build a bridge or whatever that common naff metaphor is.

You need the processes in place, the fundamentals, but I think people should be outcome focussed, not process focussed personally.

 

Christ... I feel like I'm at work now.

Also worth noting that everything can be a process or an outcome depending on the framing.

Creating goalscoring chances can be an outcome of passing interplay but can also be a process to winning games.

Winning games can be an outcome of scoring goals (and defending well) but can be a process of achieving promotion.

Achieving promotion can be an outcome of winning games but can be a process of becoming by fat the greatest team, the world has ever seen

A lot will depend on Manning and Hogg selecting the right processes to achieve our desired outcomes. I am just as interested in his Principles.

4 hours ago, 38MC said:

Interested in this part KITR. It's actually my main concern - he's not a good fit for the situation we find ourselves in. And the reason I have concerns on that front is the autocratic nature of those above him ('we don't need a CEO'), the owner seemingly out of interest; persona non-grata; actively looking to sell, an underinvested squad, a divided fan base and wholesale changes in coaching staff and needing to rebuild quite a few different functions. To me it feels like quite a big job and dare I say it's come a bit too early. 

Where he is fortunate with regards to our situation is that the powers that be really can't be seen to have failed on this one. So I suspect he will be well backed and will be given time (so long as we don't flirt with relegation).

But to me the situation is what's most worrying. 

 

Is he definitely disinterested or just didn't like Pearson and knew he'd likely not renew his contract?

It could be that with a HC that he likes, he might loosen the purse strings slightly again, though hopefully not to LJ/MA levels.

With my theory it's akin to knowing your relationship is not likely to last much longer so not spending a huge amount on them even though you can afford it. It doesn't mean you then won't spend on your next partner.

14 minutes ago, johnheadbcfc said:

Just a longterm fan that doesn't share yours and others opinion, but don't let that get in the way of trying to label me

Just another example of the inner circle of members on this forum shutting you down if you don't agree profusely.(if you check my sign up date I was here before bristol sport was even a thing) 

 

Are you suggesting that you can counter views but those opposing you can't?

There's no inner circle shutting you down (the clue is you're here posting) it's just natural that if you hold one view and 90% hold another, you're gonna face more replies opposing your view. It's the point of a forum, everyone can reply.

Anyway, +1 to the OP's view. 

Love Nige. Hate how it happened. Support Manning.

5 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

So what is the appropriate and respectful period of time before starting a " Manning Out" thread.

( just asking for a friend. Or Jon as I call him)

After the QPR game if we aren't in the top 2.

Good luck Liam